Marijuana

As well, CT scans have revealed that contrary to the plaques and fats built up in a 60 year old tobacco smoker's arteries, the aortas of elderly pot smokers on a healthy diet have almost no plaque, if any at all.

Not many Americans are aware that the prohibition of alcohol was a favor to Rockefeller, in that it banned the production of ethanol, Ethyl, as it was known.

The prohibition on cannabis is carried out through a similar sleight of hand, backed once again by our Ivory Towers of Scilence, who refuse to acknowlege cannabis as a grassroots resource the poor can use for medicine, food, fuel, clothing, paper, canvas, building materials, plastic, and things no one is allowed to dream of yet.

Not to mention have some fun. Ron Paul wants to end the trillion dollar So-called war on drugs. And immediately release all non-violent prisoners convicted on drug charges.

Money Spent on the War On Drugs this Year

Federal
State
Total

The U.S. federal government spent over $15 billion dollars in 2010 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $500 per second.

I think many people are aware of the benefits of the opium trade which have opened doors for the greatness of our American and Foreign Royalty, from long ago.

1840
Jardines, Matheson & Co illegal opium trade from India to China caused two Opium Wars

"The British Empire's historic role in the Asian opium trade is a good example of how the oligarchy functions. As documented by EIR in the book Dope, Inc., the British used Hong Kong as their base of operations, with Scottish trading companies such as Jardine Matheson both moving the product and setting up the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. (now HSBC) to handle the prodigious financial flows. As a British colony, the government of Hong Kong was run by the British monarchy, but the power was that of the British East India Company and the other private interests which controlled the British monarchy and the Empire, and the method by which this power was administered was, and is, Venetian."  This article appears in the July 6, 2007 issue of Executive Intelligence Review. The BAE Systems Affair and The Anglo-Dutch Imperial Slime Mold  by John Hoefle.

The thing about cannabis is that Robert Fleming controlled the jute industry in America and didn't want to lose it. He shut down the American operations and fields and moved it to India, if I remember correctly. 

It isn't ALCOHOL that is important, it's who owns Glass Jars and BOTTLING PLANTS. Booze is just one addicting substance that comes in a bottle, not to mention H2O.

Leighmf,

I don't quite get your post...

Are you saying alcohol prohibition was about glass bottles, and that water is like opium and cannabis?

I would posit that the prohibition of cannabis is about competition, the way alcohol competed with Standard Oil.

Again, we have a natural resource that can provide food, medicine, plastics, fuel, paper, canvas, textiles, rope, etc etc., and almost any fool can grow it, since it's a weed.

That's competition with the status quo, hence, the prohibition. 

It isn't the bottles themselves, it is the fact that you an put it in a bottle - commodification. It is commodification of things people need (money, water, air, food, energy) that allows the oligarchs to make huge profits.

The second they cannot control the market and force you to buy whatever you need in a bottle, a barrel, a pipeline, etc. they can make you dependent on them, and then they charge whatever they can without crashing the market.

On the other hand, you can grow your own cannabis, and don't need anyone to sell it to you - they can't make a profit.

The first thing colonial powers did in Southern Africa, was confiscate people's cattle, and force them onto low rainfall areas. They then charged them a tax in hard currency that could only be paid by working on large commercial farms or in the mines.

You see, the greatest enemy of the oligarchs, are people who are selfsufficient in all their needs.

So if you can feed yourself, provide your own energy, intoxicant, water - they can't make a cent off you.

That is why they are against people freely growing cannabis, that is also why Reagan ripped the solar panels off the White House.

Solar panels = free energy. They can only make a profit from that once - when they sell you the panel. Now, the energy supply to your house comes from a pipe, and is metered to see how much you use, and then you have to pay for it.

There is an excellent book on marijuana and hemp, from activist Jack Herer, The Emperor Wears No Clothes

It is really a must have book, because it is comprised of many newspaper articles from the past, great links for research and stories. There is even a photograph of Robert Mitchum sweeping his cell in prison after beign arrested for possession, and even a description of how to grow industrial hemp in German.

I've been trying to find the actual study referenced in the news report but have been unsuccessful - can anyone offer assistance?  Thanks...

Thanks for the perfect reply!

I may as well add, then, it's sand and gravel from which glass is made that comprises the base of the pyramid. Concrete can be easily proven to be the flip side of the glass industry.

The House whose foundation is sand will fall-

the hope of all who suffer, the dread of all who wrong.

The only problem I have with "legalization" is that it will set up a new Oregon Marjiuana Control Board, and the revenue will mean that homegrow and gifting will be limited.  I am for decriminalization.  While it probably is a good idea for younger people to avoid a lot of things that react with developing physiology until 'maturity,' if they are going to abuse anything, this is the safest alternative.

Those who believe there has not been sufficient 'scientific' study of the potential dangers of marijuana have ignored one of the largest public participation 'studies' in the history of the world.  If weed caused anything serious, there would be epidemics happening all around us.

It is difficult to measure the effect on the brain for musicians, however, because we are already wired differently than normal humans.  Just saying that it has not gotten in the way of great playing, unlike booze.

The story is at http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/04/health-drugs-idUSL3E8C41EU2012... and the study is at http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/12/21/aje.kwr315.abstra...

Agreed. The herbal product can enhance my music-making experience, while alcohol only numbs me, including my creativity, thinking and motor functions.

As a musician, I also agree, cannabis is very helpful to me.

Unfortunately, when I tried to grow and provide cannabis in Lake County CA, where Jack Herer lived, I found the system to be full of spies, narcs, and informants. It was impossible to do business with cannabis, unless you were one of the people working to destroy the system. Those people grew and sold most of the weed in the county, and made sure no one else slipped in to compete.

The feds swept in last fall and intimidated the local government into closing the clubs and farms.

The local Sheriff, who should have stood up to protect us under State Law, simply rolled over like a coward.

Liberty kills a lot of corruption.

More like; corruption, given liberty, kills us.

On mental health, let's compare marijuana and alcohol.

According to this page from MentalHealthArchive, 10% of heavy drinkers suffer from delirium tremens ("About a tenth of all heavy drinkers suffer this condition."), and 5% or 1/20th of sufferers who receive treatment still die of it.

1/10 x 1/20 = 1/200 or 0.5% - a minimum of 0.5% of of all heavy drinkers will die of Delirium Tremens, even with treatment.

Compare that to the incidence of schizophrenia among marijuana users with genetic predisposition to schizophrenia.

THE EARLY ONSET MYTH

Source: (TIME) The Link Between Marijuana and Schizophrenia
By Maia Szalavitz Wednesday, July 21, 2010

I'd like to live in a society in which pot was the mainstay rather than alcohol. It would be a much nicer and safer world.

It makes sense to me that a young person experiencing the disorientation that is schizophrenia would explore mind altering potentials to see if something else worked.  My own dear boy has schizophrenia, and we have lived with his nasty condition for almost two decades now.  Like his peers, he smoked a fair amount of weed in high school and later.  It was hard to notice symptoms of mental illness when they appeared in normal teen alienation and counter-dependent behavior.

Weed did not cause his mental illness, nor did it make it worse.  It may have helped, and it is far superior to other pharmeceuticals and refined plant products.  Fortunately, he never did like to get drunk.

What is clear about marijuana is that were any of the purported dangers real, we would have heard about it endlessly.  Ironically, there is a strong indication that weed does inhibit lung cancer when smoked, even when the smoker also uses tobacco.  Truly the "safer alternative."  Also clearly not an easily controlled substance for profit.  Can't have that.

Hi DRC,

I'm sorry to hear that. I hope that in future a real cure will be found.

I just heard about the following study on the Randi Rhodes Show.

From Digital Journal:

Pot smoking not related to middle-age mental function impairment
By JohnThomas Didymus
Jan 4, 2012 in Health

Reuters reports that the study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, involved 8,992 middle-aged persons participating in the U.K. national health study. They were asked if they had used any of 12 illegal drugs. The study found no evidence that past or present use of illicit drugs was associated with poorer mental performance. On the contrary, present and past users of illicit drugs performed better. The researchers pointed out, however, that the difference between drug users and non-drug users was small and may only reflect the fact that drug users tend to be better educated than the average of the population.

According to research scientist Alex Dregan of King's College London:

Studies have shown, however, that use of marijuana and other illicit drugs disturb mental performance in the short term, but Dregan and his team say

the evidence is that the effect is only temporary.

Halpern noted that studies of people who had smoked pot regularly for years showed that

once they stopped using the drug their mental performance improved rapidly.

The researchers stressed that the result of the study should not be taken as endorsement of drug use. They said that there is evidence that prolonged and heavy use of illicit drugs harm mental function.

Why would a drug harm anyone because it is defined as illicit? Does the drug know you classify it as illegal, immoral, looked down upon?

Of course not.

Then why use the word in legitimate research?

Of course, legitimate research would not use the word illicit, nor would it group drugs according to legal and moral opinion.

Illicit has a great sound though, it looks cool in print, and sounds awesome, bro'.

Good point, anonymous green.  The idea that anything that claims it is an 'authority' has 'said it is so' doesn't, in any practical, rational, or scientific sense, 'make it so' just by the claim alone.  And, from a rational (ie. 'comparative') perspective, it's hard to confirm how 'dangerous' illicit drugs are--especially if it is to be compared to 'licit recreational drugs.'   Alcohol being the primary 'licit drug' to compare to.  Withdrawal from alcohol is more dangerous (and deadly) than withdrawal from heroin--but that little 'statistic' gets conveniently ignored when 'authority' has an agenda to contend with.   Alcohol poisoning and overdoses are just as deadly (or deadlier) than any drug poisoning or overdose--so, if the 'illicit-ness' of any drug is to be compared against those that are 'licit' as a rational basis to impose a law against it, there is no rational (ie. 'comparative') basis for 'authority' to claim such 'illicit-ness'--and those who claim that 'we' have 'gone beyond rational' (especially as a basis to impose 'authoritatively') need to address that point....and, the 'sheeple' (no longer being rational in their understanding of politics, its impositions, and its justifications for doing so) complied accordingly....'the law is the law' and no citizen should rightfully 'reason beyond it'--even if a member of the jury judging one who is 'disobeying the law'.....

Richard Nixon found that out when he wanted to declare 'War on Drugs'--and, then, had an expert panel determine the most serious consequences of the drugs that Nixon wanted to declare war on.   When it came to marijuana, the panel pointed out that the most dangerous aspect of marijuana use was that it was illegal.  Period.  Since, of course, that didn't meet the agenda Nixon was after, Nixon duly ignored that conclusion and 'declared war', anyway.....'authoritarily' as if Nixon knew what he was doing 'with the law in hand'.... 

Dupont dreaming of nylon and the lucrative US Navy rope contract for one.

Nerf World

The original Tea Party were smugglers.

Our government makes people who want to grow medical Cannabis smugglers as well, under federal laws.

We are the real Tea Party, we risk our lives and our freedom every day, and I have to say how ashamed I am about the way my fellow Americans have co-opted our values on the fair taxation of goods, applying it only to their bank accounts and trust funds.

But then, America is generally a cartoon of what it claims to be.

Way to go, people!

And when the original Tea Party was done, you could pay your taxes in hemp. :)

Sure, in fact, there wouldn't be much left after a Hemp harvest but medicine, food, plastic, fabrics and smiling faces.

If you taxed it like tomatoes, instead of unfairly, a lot of out of work Americans could support themselves with a few seeds.

The Stalk Market Report, Jan 10,, 2011: Forget about trying to create an industry with the federal spies and informants doing everything they can to screw you up.

Smell the truth

http://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetruth/2012/01/10/pot-smoking-not-so-harmful-to-the-lungs-study-finds/?tsp=1

" For occasional users, smoking marijuana was actually associated with a small but statistically significant increase in lung capacity - perhaps caused by the deep-breathing pot smokers use to draw the drug into their lungs. "

Green-"If you taxed it like tomatoes, instead of unfairly, a lot of out of work Americans could support themselves with a few seeds."

Monsanto would try to GM the seeds and then claim ownership as they are with soybeans,corn and other seeds. Ordinary Americans can't be supporting themselves and cut them out.

I don't smoke weed and have not for many years. I have no problem with an adult who lights one up at home or around a campfire once or twice a year. But I have seen major changes to people smoke on a regular basis.

My main concern is the lack of any testing. Currently a truck, driver, airline, mechanic, heavy equipment operator etc. can go to work high and there is no way to prove that he is high. There is a public safety issue. There is no breathalizer test for weed.

I have noticed that it is impossible to discuss weed without discussing alcohol. Why can't weed be discussed based only on the "benefits" of weed?

I would guess that companies like Monsanto and ADM have already infiltrated the world with genetically altered cannabis, altered to make side effects occur in those who smoke it or eat it and to 'dumb' down it's beneficial 'high'. I've had the misfortune to come accross weed like this sold in dispensaries, and I've seen first hand how it is introduced into the community through the mislabeling of clones.

What we need as patients is DNA testing of the cannabis available to us, as well as testing for molds, fungus, and chemicals. We've lost people already to the paraquat, and these deaths should clue us all in to the viscious nature of those in their 'holy' drug war. To them, we are addicts, scum of the earth, and deserve to die.

There is no evidence that cannabis affects driving skills, but if you test a persons blood, it will show up, so should there ever be an accident caused by smoking weed, you'll find it.

There's no breathalyzer for oxycontin, ritalin, anti-psychotic pharmaceuticals or psychosis, either.  

There's no breathalyzer for fascism, capitalist piggism, or corrupt politicianism, but these things kill more people in our world than any drug I've ever come across. 

There are urine tests. In fact THC stays in the system so long, that you can't tell whether they smoked today or upto a month ago.

On the other hands, there are signs whether someone is high on weed (red-eye, cotton mouth, a generally mellow demeanor depending on the type of weed). In fact it is very easy to tell when Bill Maher is or is not baked. :)

Also, there are a lot of prescription drugs that people are taking right now, legally, that clearly impair judgment. Diazepam, all kinds of opium derivatives (morphine, codeine, oxicontin), and of course MDMAs like Prozac/Ecstacy.

Terence McKenna famously stated that 'we are all holding', because the body's pineal gland makes lots of DMT - usually referred to as 'falling asleep'.

Which is probably the biggest risk on the job.

Discussing the "benefits" of weed inevitably leads to the subject of why it is illegal.  Once you discuss it's illegality, you inevitably compare it to other intoxicants which are illegal as well as those that are legal (i.e. alcohol).  Weed discussions always lead to alcohol discussions, like the gateway drug it is always accused of being.

The lack of breathalizer issue really is best case to be made for NOT legalizing pot.  In fact, it might be the ONLY case to be made when you do a direct comparison to alcohol.

Real science would find there is no 'best case' for not legalizing, fairly taxing, and allowing a cannabis economy to flourish in America, and real law enforcement would agree as well.

Real leaders would simply do it.

Real medicine would thank them all for it, as would millions of real Americans.

Too bad we live in a real violent cartoon, with real villanous people running the animation.

So where is the breathalizer test for ambien, prozac or liquid morphine?

If you are a truck driver or a heavy equipment operator involved in an accident you will be drug tested. The meds that you mention will be detected. They will be able to determine if you are under the influence. With weed they can only tell that you smoked recently, not that you are under the influence. You could have smoked 4 minutes ago or 4 days ago. No way to tell.

Wrong, a blood test, like you can request for alcohol, can determine if you are under the influence of cannabis.

Of course, any trace of cannabis in your system is good reason to crucify you, should you happen to exhibit human error.

Hell, why don't we crucify you anyway, I don't like the way you look.

ag, can you really test to see if I am high now or smoked a bowl yesterday?  Is there a THC level indicator or something that makes it more than the residual sign of consumption?  I think rigel 1 is right about how the testing works now, and it is a good reason not to think that drug testing has much value.

I think the best way to use anything like drug testing is to watch the behavior and performance of people involved in risky professions.  Given the stress put on truckers and the varying places on the speed spectrum that they find themselves to make a schedule, worrying that they are toking up as well is small change.  It may even be the way to mellow out the speed.

The idea that we live in a society of sober and professional people who respect the morality of the War on Drugs is foolishness.  Legal drugs have side effects too.  We are not all Hunter Thompson, but sobriety is highly over-rated as a norm and being clear and in control of the wheel is what the coffee stop has always been about.  Use drugs judiciously and responsibly, but don't pretend that sobriety is always the best alternative or the likely one.

When they drug test Congress, the Supremes and the Banksters, ok include the White House, I will believe their good intentions.

Yes,  a blood test is a reliable indicator of whether you used cannabis recently. It gets to your brain by way of your bloodstream

However, there is no 'legitimate' amount of cannabis that is allowed, so they test your pee.

This fingers you as a drug addict, loses you your job, and allows the law to crucify you in under the penal codes, and opens you up to civil damages.

The Ivory Towers of Scilence, remain silent as to a level of cannabis that is safe and will not cause the user to drive into a crowd of pedestrians or start a slave rebellion.

TV is filled with ads for drugs, and many products sold are 'legal' highs; to stay awake and alert, and have energy.

Cannabis is the energy bar/drink of the slaves, and it always will be. The police keep it that way, since it makes it easier to arrest a slave should he get too cocky.

We in the Real Tea Party will make sure it's available to you.

Real Tea

Real Party

The Stalk Market Report: Jan. 12, 2012

A Green

I know that I have described this before but I was in a seminar on 'drug abuse' and one of the topics was on drug testing done by an expert in that field (one that was used in court cases as an expert witness).   Surprisingly (I thought), his whole point was that random drug testing in the work place was inappropriate, unnecessary, and actually counterproductive.  He pointed out that most drug users, just like alcohol users, don't use drugs on the job.   And, when it came to poor work performance and work ethic, drugs probably weren't the biggest offenders--more work was compromised due to things like domestic upheavals and depression.   And, when it came to the most offending drug with regards to work performance, it wasn't tested in random drug tests--alcohol.  

He also pointed out that the corporations used the policies to drug test under the premise that it was 'weeding out the bad workers' without one iota of proof (typical for corporate policies--and even some government policies--and their form of 'rationale'--based more on prejudice than anything else).   Very few studies had been done to tell whether 'positive drug test' employees were worse on their jobs than those who weren't positive.   He did say that, of the few, one was designed to study hospital workers.   They drug tested all the potential employees--but they hired them according to the interview.   Then, they followed them over a period of time comparing them to several parameters--medication errors, number of absences on the job, number of patient and fellow worker complaints about them, etc.   He said that, across the board, the positive drug test employees performed better.  

Now, that's not to say that he condoned getting high or doing drugs on the job--but it was evidence that most drug users use drugs on their own time.  Of course, if a specific incident indicated someone was altered or had a work problem, along with a more general evaluation for things like domestic upheavals and depression, a drug screen could be warranted (including alcohol).   But, 'blaming the drug' for the bad performance was more used as a form of corporate control of all worker behavior in random drug screens (right in line with 'workers' being just 'another commodity in the financial transaction' to be manipulated at the whims of the corporate controllers--certainly can't have 'independent thought' and 'independent behavior' when it comes to 'corporate policy', can we?)--and certainly more so than acknowledging 'credit to the worker who responsibly used recreational drugs' and performed well at work anyway.....their 'rationale' didn't opt for that possibility....but at least one study did indicate that possibility did exist.....

The preceding post explains the situation perfectly.

I would only add that it's obvious from our present pharmaceutical marketing that America wants us all on drugs, as long as we buy the drugs from the pushers on TV and in print.

The Stalk Market Report: Jan 13, 2012

Real Tea

Real Party 

Marijuana lung findings unlikely to change minds

Marijuana smoke is not damaging to the lungs like tobacco smoke, study finds. But that conclusion probably will not change minds in the legalization debate. (Lawrence K. Ho / Los Angeles Times)

By Shari Roan, Los Angeles Times / For the Booster Shots blog
1:30 p.m. EST, January 11, 2012

Marijuana smoke does not damage lungs in the same manner as tobacco smoke, according to a study released Tuesday. But that conclusion probably will not change minds as to whether the drug should be legalized.

The study found that smoking marijuana on an occasional basis does not appear to significantly damage the lungs. Published in the Journal of the American Medical Assn., the paper supports previous research that has also failed to find a link between low or moderate exposure to marijuana smoke and lung damage. Marijuana contains many of the same chemicals as tobacco smoke.

Researchers led by Mark Pletcher at UC San Francisco studied 5,115 men and women in four U.S. cities regarding their current and lifetime exposure to tobacco smoke and marijuana smoke and their lung function. The exposure to marijuana smoke was expressed by "joint years," with smoking 365 joints or filled pipe bowls being equal to one joint year.

The study showed that lung function declined with increased exposure to tobacco smoke. However, that same pattern was not seen with marijuana smoke. There was no evidence of lung function damage with seven joint years (or smoking one joint a day for seven years.) After 10 years, there was some decline in lung function as measured by the speed at which a person can blow out air.

"Our findings suggest that occasional use of marijuana for [medical] purposes may not be associated with adverse consequences on pulmonary function," Pletcher said in a news release. "On the other hand, our findings do suggest an accelerated decline in pulmonary function with heavier use -- either very frequent use or frequent use over many years -- and a resulting need for caution and moderation when marijuana use is considered."

Understanding the pros and cons of marijuana use is of growing interest as marijuana usage rates rise and as states considered legalization of marijuana for medical or even recreational purposes. Pro-legalization advocates said the study shows marijuana can be used safely.

"To those familiar with the science of cannabis, JAMA’s [Journal of the American Medical Assn.'s] findings should come as no great surprise," said Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, in a blog post. He adds that marijuana can be used in ways that avoid most lung irritation.

". . .ingestion of cannabis via alternative methods such as edibles, liquid tinctures, or via vaporization — a process whereby the plant’s cannabinoids are heated to the point of vaporization but below the point of combustion -- virtually eliminates consumers’ exposure to such unwanted risk factors and has been determined to be a ‘safe and effective’ method of ingestion in clinical trial settings," Armentano said.

However, the National Institute on Drug Abuse maintains marijuana is dangerous on many other levels, such as by impairing driving and interfering with learning and brain development when used by adolescents.

"The use of marijuana can produce adverse physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral effects," said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the institute, writing on the NIDA website. "It can impair short-term memory and judgment and distort perception. Because marijuana affects brain systems that are still maturing through young adulthood, its use by teens may have a negative effect on their development. And contrary to popular belief, it can be addictive."

Follow me: twitter.com/LATShariRoan

By the way, apart from helping with addiction to opium derivatives and cocaine, Ibogaine (Tabernanthe Iboga) also helps with PTSD. This article looks at the alkaloids in Salvia Divinorum.

Research helping combat drug addiction
January 13, 2012

(Medical Xpress) -- Better help with battling drug addiction could be at hand as a result of research underway at Victoria University of Wellington.

Dr Bronwyn Kivell, a Senior Lecturer in the School of Biological Sciences, is screening a number of anti-addiction compounds that may ultimately form the basis of medications that help reduce cravings and prevent relapses for people addicted to psychostimulants such as cocaine or methamphetamine.

Collaborating with a medicinal chemist at the University of Kansas in the United States along with her Victoria University colleague Professor Susan Schenk, Dr Kivell is investigating ways of targeting a protein in the brain, called the kappa opioid receptor, which can alter a person’s perception of mood, reward and pain.

The researchers are focused on a Mexican herb called salvia divinorum, also known as Mexican or Tijuana tripping weed, a powerful hallucinogen that has been chewed by Mexican Indians for centuries.

Most hallucinogenic substances affect serotonin, a neurotransmitter in the body that influences people’s sense of well-being, but Dr Kivell says salvia is different.

"It has a unique structure and contains compounds that we think could have anti-addictive properties."

The compounds are being developed at the University of Kansas and tested at Victoria University.

A usual problem with compounds that target kappa opioid receptors, says Dr Kivell, is their tendency to have extreme side effects such as nausea and depression.

"However, some of those we are testing have much milder side effects."

Another strand of Dr Kivell’s research targets more effective therapies to help people stop smoking. She says while nicotine is the major addictive component in cigarettes, there are many other things in cigarette smoke that contribute to addiction.

Her research, being carried out with Crown Research Institute ESR (Institute of Environmental Science and Research), is studying the role of a number of minor tobacco alkaloids.

"Most tools to help people quit smoking are based on nicotine replacement and have relatively low success rates. Our goal is to work out if it is feasible to develop other anti-smoking aids that target proteins in the brain that are involved in addiction."

Dr Kivell, who completed her PhD at Victoria, has also carried out drug addiction research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Baltimore in the United States.

She returned to Victoria to work on a ground-breaking project that is looking at both the cell biology and the behavioural patterns resulting from long-term use of MDMA or ecstasy.

The work is a collaboration between Victoria’s School of Biological Sciences and School of Psychology and aims to better understand the changes ecstasy causes in the brain’s neurochemistry and its impact on behaviour.

"Drug addiction research is exciting science and it’s also very relevant. Banning every mind-altering drug is not going to work so we need to find therapies to help people with their addiction.

"It’s a very complex field and there is a lot yet to understand about why some people who take drugs get addicted and others don’t."

Dr Kivell has had funding from the Neurological Foundation, the Wellington Medical Research Foundation and the Health Research Council (HRC).

Provided by Victoria University

Prozac is not a drug in the same class as ambien or morphine. It is an SSRI, not a narcotic.

Because the worst that happens when a person smokes too much is they fall asleep.

I remember an old doctor telling me that marijuana used to be put into a pill form called 'Green Mountain'--and prescribed for asthma.  But, of course, that doctor was old and that hasn't been possible for 60 or 70 years or so.   Even at the time, that doctor agreed with me, 'Oh, no, you can't even mention any potential benefit of marijuana without risking your license--I wouldn't even talk of such things in the general public now....'

Of course, the above conversation was made before the states started passing 'medical marijuana' legislation--that doctors in such states are still getting flack for with their federal government DEA license.   This looks like it could appropriately be a 'constitutional battle' on which entity has more authority in determining health care applications--the states vs. the federal government.  I think that the constitution is actually on the side of the states in this (that's why Roe vs. Wade, once it established the preempting, and absolute, legal parameters of unalienable individual rights between the mother's choice to abort up to 12 weeks and the fetus/child's right to life at birth, left the decision on how to address any other 'health care administration' of the pregnancy concerning the mother's, or the fetus's, behalf up to each state to determine and distinguish, accordingly)--but, the federal government has the backing of the big pharmaceutical corporations and the mainstream, corporate-backed, media--and, of course, the complacency of the general public--to work with.....

The THCV that is high in many African strains helps against Parkinson's. From the NIH website:

Symptom-relieving and neuroprotective effects of the phytocannabinoid ?^(9)-THCV in animal models of Parkinson's disease.

Symptom-relieving and neuroprotective effects of the phytocannabinoid ?^(9)-THCV in animal models of Parkinson's disease.
García C, Palomo-Garo C, García-Arencibia M, Ramos J, Pertwee R, Fernández-Ruiz J.
Source

Departamento de Bioquímica y Biología Molecular, Instituto Universitario de Investigación en Neuroquímica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

Previous findings have indicated that a cannabinoid, such as ?(9)-THCV, which has antioxidant properties and the ability to activate CB(2) receptors but to block CB(1) , might be a promising therapy for alleviating symptoms and delaying neurodegeneration in Parkinson's disease (PD).

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH:

The ability of ?(9)-THCV to reduce motor inhibition and provide neuroprotection was investigated in rats lesioned with 6-hydroxydopamine and in mice lesioned with lipopolysaccharide (LPS).

KEY RESULTS:

Acute administration of ?(9)-THCV attenuated the motor inhibition caused by 6-hydroxydopamine, presumably through changes in glutamatergic transmission. Moreover, chronic administration of ?(9)-THCV attenuated the loss of tyrosine hydroxylase-positive neurones caused by 6-hydroxydopamine in the substantia nigra, through an effect related to its antioxidant properties (it was reproduced by cannabidiol -enriched botanical extract). In addition, CB(2) receptor-deficient mice responded to 6-hydroxydopamine in a similar manner to wild-type animals, and CB(2) receptors were poorly up-regulated in the rat substantia nigra in response to 6-hydroxydopamine. By contrast, the substantia nigra of mice that had been injected with LPS exhibited a greater up-regulation of CB(2) receptors. In these animals, ?(9)-THCV also caused preservation of tyrosine hydroxylase-positive neurones.

This effect probably involved CB(2) receptors as it was also elicited by the selective CB(2) receptor agonist, HU-308, and CB(2) receptor-deficient mice were more vulnerable to LPS lesions.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Given its antioxidant properties and its ability to activate CB(2) but to block CB(1) receptors, ?(9)-THCV has a promising pharmacological profile for delaying disease progression in PD and also for ameliorating parkinsonian symptoms.

I tell my medical pros that I don't smoke tobacco, not that I don't smoke.  They understand the distinction, but if they tried to issue me a medical card they would get the axe from the clinic administration. 

The concern about powerful pot is absurd.  Just smoke less if it gets you "too high."  That has not been a problem for me, and while I don't make a practice of toking up before professional work, there have been occasions when I was called to cover for another when I had not planned to work, and I had to go high.  It has never gotten in the way of my work.  I find it focuses me on what I have to do, want to do, and helps me avoid the stuff I really don't have to or want to do.  That works out pretty well because chores are have to do even if they are not fun, and pot can help with that too.

If there were medical issues with marijuana, we would be experiencing a pandemic given how much weed is smoked every day in America. 

Hi DRC,

Right, there is no LD50 for THC or weed. You can smoke less to get the same effect.

And what is so special about the 15% number? In Holland there is an initiative to ban weed with a THC content of over 15% from coffeeshops. Here is an initiative from Republican Mark Kirk to ban weed with 15% THC or over. This is all about collusion and coordination of public policy on a global scale. And it are these Koch/Rockefeller/etc 'thinktanks' that are at the center of it.

Kirk crusades for crackdown on strong pot
June 12, 2009 5:09 PM |

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk will call for legislation Monday that would toughen drug trafficking laws regarding a highly-potent form of marijuana, with penalties of up to 25 years in prison for a 1st-time offense.

The law would target offenders who sell or distribute marijuana that has a THC content exceeding 15 percent, which is between 5 and 10 percent higher than average marijuana, according to Kirk's office. THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, is the main active ingredient in marijuana.

Drug dealers are increasingly cross-breeding plants to produce high-potency variants of marijuana, which are called "kush" in street slang when they have 20 percent THC, according to Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran.

"When you amplify the strength of it, you are increasing the harm to the system," said Curran, who supports the legislation, which would amend a federal law. "They are more dangerous behind the wheel of a vehicle. It's not a good idea to have people that messed up."

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has reported that kush sells for as high as $600 per ounce--creating the same profit potential as crack cocaine, according to Kirk.

He will release more information during a news conference in Chicago Monday, where he will be joined by representatives from the Lake County Sheriff's Department, the Lake County Metropolitan Enforcement Group and Waukegan Police Department.

-- Lisa Black